How is it that American politics is so much more negative to the opposition more than focusing on own policy?

Answer 1

Sadly....because it works.

Despite the fact that we all shout about how much we dont like negative campaigning, the statistics bear out that it is REALLY effective.......

Embarrassingly enough, we are much more interested in hearing dirt about someone just trashing them than we are about substantial policy issues....

Sorry to say....the fault lies with us. If we stop accepting and REWARDING the negativity, they will stop doing it......

Answer 2

There is NO DIFFERENCE in policy between them. The differences are SO small, that putting ones views in bullet points, you could not tell them apart. They must talk trash to make the difference.

For example, Hillary, Giuliani, and Romney are ALL
. Pro War
. Pro Patriot Act
. Pro Gun Control
. Pro Big Government
. Anti Constitutional

The other minor issues are birdseed thrown in the sand for the rest who absorb a steady diet of mediction, poll results, and tv.

Notice the 1 man who isnt talking trash, has a honest, and different policy.

Answer 3

It is sad, but a true fact. I think a lot of people don't really know much about their parties past their basic beliefs the media talks about. So rather than talking about their own policies, it is easier to put down those they are against.

Answer 4

Because the other party cannot answer the same question, or they don't have a solution. Kinda like now, with the candidates bashing President Bush and his foreign policy and Iraq. Bush is gone, we know Bush made mistakes but they don't want to talk about how they will fix it, only how the out-going President did wrong.

Answer 5

Because it is easier to attack the other person.

In my state, the Republican candidate was way ahead in the polls but refused to run a negative campaign even when he was attacked by the other candidates. I don't remember the specifics, but he is a clean and popular guy in a conservative state and he lost. He was expected to win in a landslide.

That fact is that negative campaigning is effective.

Answer 6

The US is a country that worships the Market and because of its belief in the power of market forces, it allows aggression in the guise of powerful competition to filter through to every area of its social life - even politics. One sees the unsung motto 'who dares wins' in operation everywhere. It has become a driving force, regardless of how the winning is achieved. A sad thing to see when politicians go out of their way to damage others in other that they may get ahead.

Answer 7

The US electorate are more tolerant of it.
However, a big factor is that groups independent from the candidates can place election adverts. It is often these adverts that are the most negative where they will highlight and criticise the candidate's stance on a particular issue (eg. abortion or gun control).

Answer 8

I think the candidates, at least on the Republican side, articulate their own positions quite clearly. The Democrats don't as much because if they did people would realize how socialist they were. So they obfuscate as much as possible.

But once your position is out in the public for scrutiny, I see nothing wrong with informing the electorate how messed up your opponents are and how much better you are.

Answer 9

The American public have a greater tolerance for that kind of politics than we do in the UK. We do have it...but voters here get restless if there is too much of it.

Answer 10

Because the policy issues that concern our citizens they either

1) can't be solved, or
2) aren't wished to be solved by the ones in power

So all that is left is making the opponent look worse than you.